I dunno. I see what you say (but would push it back to Franco-Prussian War), but at the same time feel that the French have always been behind in a technological mindset (note that I do not discount other groups falling into this trend). For example, during the Hundred Years War, the French undervalued the strength of longbowmen and relied heavily on heavy cavalry, while the combination of English longbow and lighter cavalry tore it up in the field. Come the American Civil War, Europe had a chance to take note of what industry could contribute to war, but failed to do so for the most part. The French fell on this especially hard, not meeting the German focus on military equipment and losing the Franco-Prussian War. With WWI, they held the line, but fell into the same Cult of the Offensive which all other European nations did and fell back on it again in WWII, when the Germans moved ahead in their equipment development. It wasn't just the number of men which caused the Maginot Line to falter, but also the French insistence that countering new tanks would not be necessary, although it required little more than a wider trench.
The Napoleonic Wars saw them doing a little better, but it was the British that saw the promise of snipers and artillery defending formations. The column was Napoleon's biggest advantage, but that alone was limited and he was incapable of moving past it.
Just my thoughts.
